SIGNALDATAAccountability. For the People. Preview
License-plate readers · Contra Costa County

Contra Costa County

Using license-plate readers · 5 agencies documented

← Statewide map
Alameda CountyAlpine CountyAmador CountyButte CountyCalaveras CountyColusa CountyContra Costa CountyDel Norte CountyEl Dorado CountyFresno CountyGlenn CountyHumboldt CountyImperial CountyInyo CountyKern CountyKings CountyLake CountyLassen CountyLos Angeles CountyMadera CountyMarin CountyMariposa CountyMendocino CountyMerced CountyModoc CountyMono CountyMonterey CountyNapa CountyNevada CountyOrange CountyPlacer CountyPlumas CountyRiverside CountySacramento CountySan Benito CountySan Bernardino CountySan Diego CountySan Francisco CountySan Joaquin CountySan Luis Obispo CountySan Mateo CountySanta Barbara CountySanta Clara CountySanta Cruz CountyShasta CountySierra CountySiskiyou CountySolano CountySonoma CountyStanislaus CountySutter CountyTehama CountyTrinity CountyTulare CountyTuolumne CountyVentura CountyYolo CountyYuba County

Richmond Police Department

Status
Use suspended
Vendors
Flock Safety
Cameras
110
110 ALPR cameras per Oct. 2026 staff proposal (ContraCosta.news); Richmond Confidential reported more than 120 (April 2026).
Contract
Flock Safety: · to Dec. 31, 2026 · approved by Richmond City Council March 17, 2026 · Extension of time only, no added funds; original contract expired Feb. 28, 2026. Approved 4-3 (Brown, Bana, Zepeda, Robinson yes; Martinez, Jimenez, Wilson no). Amendment proposes a $290,000 penalty per unauthorized-sharing violation. (ContraCosta.news, March 19, 2026; ContraCosta.news, March 4, 2026)
  1. Nov. 19, 2025 Chief Tim Simmons switched the Flock cameras off after finding a two-way national search feature active. (ContraCosta.news, March 19, 2026; Richmond Confidential, April 30, 2026)
  2. March 3, 2026 Council took no action on the extension after lengthy public comment. (ContraCosta.news, March 4, 2026)
  3. March 17, 2026 Council voted 4-3 to turn the cameras back on and extend through Dec. 31, 2026, while issuing an RFP. (ContraCosta.news, March 19, 2026)
  4. Oct. 6, 2026 Council approved 5-2 an Axon amendment for body cameras and other equipment but held back the ALPR portion, which would replace Flock camera-for-camera, for further review. Axon scored 229 of 300 vs. Flock's 209. (ContraCosta.news, Oct. 7, 2026; KQED, Sept. 22, 2026)
Conflicts and open questions
  • Shutoff date differs: Nov. 19, 2025 (ContraCosta.news) vs. October 2025 (Richmond Standard) vs. November 2025 (Richmond Confidential).
  • Status set to 'suspended' because no source confirms the cameras were switched back on after the March 2026 vote; Richmond Confidential (April 30) said reactivation awaited a finalized amendment.
  • Some event dates here are inferred from weekday references (such as “Tuesday”) in news reports; confirm from meeting records.

Reported by news outlets; agency records not yet obtained.

Antioch Police Department

Status
Using license-plate readers
Vendors
Flock Safety, Motorola Solutions, Axon
Cameras
17
17 Flock cameras per April 2026 announcement; some Motorola Vigilant cameras offline; 55 Axon fixed ALPR locations approved Aug. 2026.
Contract
Flock Safety: $99,000 per year · to Aug. 2027 · Per Lt. Mellone, Aug. 2026: city pays $99,000 a year; contract runs out in about 12 months. (ContraCosta.news, Aug. 27, 2026)
Contract
Axon: $661,688 49-month total · from Oct. 2026 · to Nov. 2030 · approved by Antioch City Council Aug. 25, 2026 · Sole-source; 55 fixed ALPR locations and 6 in-car units. Approved 4-0, Wilson absent. (ContraCosta.news, Aug. 27, 2026; KQED, Sept. 22, 2026)
Contract
Axon: $2,908,607 five-year total · approved by Antioch City Council · 2025 proposal including 49 in-car units with ALPR and 8 lightpost ALPRs at no cost; approval outcome not reported in source. (ContraCosta.news, Aug. 25, 2025)
  1. April 16, 2026 Police launched a Flock transparency portal; data kept 30 days. (ContraCosta.news, April 17, 2026)
  2. Aug. 25, 2026 Council approved the Axon ALPR deal; police said removing Flock is a priority. (ContraCosta.news, Aug. 27, 2026)
Conflicts and open questions
  • Some event dates here are inferred from weekday references (such as “Tuesday”) in news reports; confirm from meeting records.

Reported by news outlets; agency records not yet obtained.

El Cerrito Police Department

Status
Ended or removed
Vendors
Flock Safety
Cameras
40
40 Flock cameras, per the police department's Feb. 2026 statement and Richmond Standard.
  1. June 2023 Flock cameras were in use by June 2023. A department audit begun in early 2026 found that out-of-state and federal agencies could search the city's data from June to August 2023, and recorded later federal searches by the Postal Inspection Service (Sept.-Nov. 2023) and Loma Linda VA police (May 2025). (ContraCosta.news, Feb. 27, 2026)
  2. May 5, 2026 Council voted 3-2 not to renew (Quinto and Wysinger dissenting). Options had been $315,000 over three years or $105,000 for one year. (ContraCosta.news, May 6, 2026; Richmond Standard, June 12, 2026)
  3. June 6, 2026 All cameras deactivated; Flock scheduled physical removal for July 30-Aug. 18. (Richmond Standard, June 12, 2026; ContraCosta.news, July 29, 2026)
Conflicts and open questions
  • Deactivation date: June 6 (police statement, Richmond Standard) vs. June 7 (ContraCosta.news headline).

Reported by news outlets; agency records not yet obtained.

Concord Police Department

Status
Program documented, current use unconfirmed
Vendors
Vendor not named in source
Cameras
65
65 cameras approved in 2022; current count not confirmed.
Contract
Vendor not named in source: $789,187 not-to-exceed · approved by Concord City Council Aug. 23, 2022 · Cameras and software; vendor not named in text (story tagged Flock Safety). (Local News Matters (Bay City News), Aug. 25, 2022)
  1. Aug. 23, 2022 Council unanimously approved 65 plate-reading cameras. (Local News Matters (Bay City News), Aug. 25, 2022)
Conflicts and open questions
  • Approval date inferred from 'Tuesday' in Aug. 25 article.
  • An El Cerrito article noted a 2024 case solved in Concord using the system, but no 2025-2026 Concord source found.
  • Some event dates here are inferred from weekday references (such as “Tuesday”) in news reports; confirm from meeting records.

Reported by news outlets; agency records not yet obtained.

Oakley Police Department

Status
Using license-plate readers
Vendors
Flock Safety, Motorola Solutions
  1. July 2024 City Council voted 5-0 to stop sharing ALPR data with out-of-state agencies. (ContraCosta.news, July 17, 2026)
  2. July 15, 2026 An audit after a records request found Flock and Vigilant data had been shared with a Border Patrol sector and another federal agency; the city removed their access and set an audit schedule. (ContraCosta.news, July 17, 2026)
Conflicts and open questions
  • Smaller city included because it made news.

Reported by news outlets; agency records not yet obtained.

Statewide

  1. Jan. 1, 2016 SB 34 (Statutes of 2015, Chapter 532), codified at Civil Code section 1798.90.5 and following, took effect. It requires ALPR operators and end users to keep a usage and privacy policy, log access, and share ALPR information only with public agencies. The Attorney General reads 'public agency' to exclude out-of-state and federal agencies. (California Department of Justice, Office of the Attorney General, Oct. 27, 2023)
  2. Feb. 13, 2020 The California State Auditor released report 2019-118 on the Fresno Police Department, LAPD, Marin County Sheriff's Office and Sacramento County Sheriff's Office. It found none of the four audited staff searches of ALPR images, three of the four shared images without first checking the recipient's right and need to know, and 70 percent of surveyed agencies ran or planned to run ALPR. It recommended a state model policy and a maximum retention period set in law. (California State Auditor, Feb. 13, 2020)
  3. Oct. 27, 2023 The Attorney General's Division of Law Enforcement issued Information Bulletin 2023-DLE-06, telling state and local agencies that SB 34 bars sharing ALPR information with out-of-state and federal agencies, with model policy guidance. (California Department of Justice, Office of the Attorney General, Oct. 27, 2023; California Office of the Attorney General, Oct. 3, 2025)
  4. April 2, 2024 Gov. Gavin Newsom announced a California Highway Patrol contract with Flock Safety for about 480 cameras: about 290 on Oakland surface streets and 190 on East Bay state highways, with a 28-day retention period. (Office of Governor Gavin Newsom, April 2, 2024)
  5. June 18, 2025 CalMatters and The Markup reported, from a search log obtained by Oakland Privacy covering April 28 to May 30, 2025, that 10 agencies, nine in Southern California and six in Los Angeles County, ran searches for ICE, including LAPD; the Orange and San Diego County sheriffs ran searches for Border Patrol. Riverside County logged four 'hsinvest' searches but said they were narcotics cases. (The Markup / CalMatters, June 18, 2025)
  6. Oct. 2025 Gov. Newsom vetoed SB 274, which would have required deletion of some ALPR data after 60 days, officer training, documented case reasons for searches and random Department of Justice audits. His veto message said the 60-day limit could impede investigations, particularly cold cases. (CalMatters, Oct. 3, 2025)
  7. Oct. 3, 2025 Attorney General Rob Bonta filed a petition for a writ of mandate in San Diego County Superior Court against the City of El Cajon, its police department and Chief Jeremiah Larson, alleging the department shared ALPR data with agencies in 26 other states in violation of SB 34. The AG's office said it had contacted 18 agencies about possible violations since 2024. (California Office of the Attorney General, Oct. 3, 2025; CalMatters, Oct. 3, 2025)
  8. Nov. 24, 2025 CHP Commissioner Sean Duryee wrote to Flock Safety CEO Garrett Langley that data from CHP's Flock cameras may not be shared with federal officials, citing the contract's bar on sharing outside California. (KTVU FOX 2, Nov. 24, 2025)
  9. Jan. 2026 The Attorney General filed a motion in California v. City of El Cajon asking the court to order the city to stop sharing ALPR data with out-of-state agencies; the AG said the data reached more than 100 agencies outside California. A hearing was set for Feb. 13, 2026. No ruling was found in sources checked as of Oct. 17, 2026. (California Office of the Attorney General, Jan. 21, 2026; NBC 7 San Diego, Jan. 22, 2026; NBC 7 San Diego, Feb. 8, 2026)
  10. Aug. 31, 2026 SB 1013 (Cervantes), similar to the vetoed SB 274, passed the Senate but did not receive an Assembly floor vote before the session ended; CalMatters reported Assembly Majority Leader Cecilia Aguiar-Curry held it. CalMatters counted this as the fifth straight year without new ALPR rules; nearly 40 law enforcement agencies and unions opposed the bill. (CalMatters (republished by LAist), Sept. 3, 2026; CalMatters Digital Democracy, date not shown)
  11. Oct. 2026 A Santa Clara County Superior Court judge dismissed a challenge to San Jose's ALPR network, rejecting claims that warrantless searches of ALPR data violate the state constitution's privacy and search provisions (outside this researcher's counties; recorded as statewide legal context). (San Jose Spotlight (republished by Local News Matters), Oct. 7, 2026)

State agencies

California Highway Patrol

Status
Using license-plate readers
Vendors
Flock Safety, Vendor not named in source
Cameras
Count not documented
No statewide count found. The 2024 East Bay contract covers about 480 Flock cameras (about 290 Oakland streets, 190 East Bay highways); CHP also runs mobile ALPR on patrol vehicles under General Order 81.1.
Data sharing
CHP's contract with Flock bars sharing with the federal government or any entity outside California, per the commissioner's Nov. 2025 letter (ca1-ktvu-chp-letter). Vehicle Code 2413 bars making data available to non-law-enforcement agencies or individuals.
  1. Oct. 2020 General Order 81.1 (revised October 2020) sets CHP's ALPR rules: mobile ALPR data is kept 60 days and then purged, access is limited to personnel with an investigative need, and ALPR use is reported each year in the auto theft report to the Legislature. (California Highway Patrol, Oct. 2020)
  2. Oct. 2020 Vehicle Code 2413 limits CHP retention of plate-reader data to 60 days except for evidence or felony investigations, bars selling the data, and limits its use to locating vehicles or people suspected in a public offense. (California Legislature (via california.public.law), date not shown)
  3. Feb. 8, 2024 The Oaklandside reported CHP would run Oakland's 300-camera Flock network funded by a $1.2 million state loan; CHP keeps data 60 days while Oakland and Flock agreed to 30. (The Oaklandside, Feb. 8, 2024)
  4. April 2, 2024 The governor's office announced the CHP-Flock contract for about 480 cameras in Oakland and the East Bay with 28-day retention. (Office of Governor Gavin Newsom, April 2, 2024)
  5. Nov. 24, 2025 The CHP commissioner told Flock in writing that CHP camera data cannot be shared with federal officials. (KTVU FOX 2, Nov. 24, 2025)
Conflicts and open questions
  • Retention differs by source: 60 days (GO 81.1, mobile ALPR; Vehicle Code 2413 cap), 28 days (governor's release on the East Bay Flock network), 60 days (Oaklandside on CHP practice). These may describe different systems.
  • No CHP Flock deployment in the ten southern counties was found; not checked through CHP contract records (searches exhausted).

From agency records.